[IAEP] SoaS as a Sugar Labs project.

Tomeu Vizoso tomeu at sugarlabs.org
Tue Aug 25 11:38:59 EDT 2009

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 17:03, Michael Stone<michael at laptop.org> wrote:
>>El Mon, 24-08-2009 a las 20:58 +0200, Martin Langhoff escribi=F3:
>>> And also... and completely from the outside... I'll apologise in
>>> advance for saying something I know might be controversial. I worry
>>> that SL seems to have -- for a external party like me -- more
>>> bureaucracy than it has people "doing". IMHExperience, the projects I
>>> enjoy working on, and that I see being productive have  a much lower
>>> "procedure/label/committe " : contributor ratio.
>>I don't necessarily disagree with you, but just 2 days ago I was offered
>>an advice on the other side of the spectrum by Michael: he notes that a
>>lot of important things are falling through the cracks because nobody
>>organizes the available resources.  His suggestion is to introduce real
>>project management into the game, which is basically what David's
>>Projects idea seems to bring.
> For the record, I consider my puny efforts to offer more support for Martin's
> and Greg's remarks than for David's.
> (The analysis is simply that our current situation is unsurprising given the
> facts that, first, SL seems to consist more of leaders than of followers and
> second, that there seems to be a real dearth of people who care more about
> getting other people unstuck than about making progress on their own pet
> projects.)
> (Though, obviously, I'm more guilty than most here.)
>> A meta-comment on your post: you don't need to apologize and be shy for
>> offering your criticism, no matter how many people will disagree with
>> you.
> Actually, he does need to apologize and to be shy because doing so makes it
> easier for folks to hear what he's trying to say.
> (In our current environment, it works rather similarly to good-cop/bad-cop.)
>> I recently got useful criticism from Bemasc, Christoph and Daniel on
>> #sugar regarding our relationship with Deployments.  Their feeling is
>> that we didn't do enough to get them involved, mine is that our efforts
>> to reach out have been largely unsuccessful for reasons I do not fully
>> understand.
> Here's another reason for you to consider:
> I have come to believe that many people involved in deployments have *learned*
> that they're not going to get anything useful out of interacting with SL
> because:
> 1. SL has largely ignored the feedback supplied by these deployments in
> 2007-2008 and exhaustively documented by Greg Smith and S Page at
>   http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Feature_roadmap#Roadmap
> and also because
> 2. most members of SL express comparatively little interest in developing
> seriously for the XO-1 and for the specific network, cognitive, and logistics
> resources of of these deployments.

I don't understand how this helps to this discussion. It's obvious
that Sugar Labs doesn't have the resources to take all software
development for OLPC deployments.

What we propose is NOT getting hired by the countries for taking over
their responsibilities, but rather that working in Sugar Labs with
other organizations with similar interests is favourable for them.



«Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar.
What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David

More information about the IAEP mailing list